Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Maintainability of appeals u/s 377 of CrPC against inadequate sentence was examined. Offences u/s 279-A of IT Act, 1961 are non-cognizable, triable by Magistrate. Special Court for economic offences, presided over by Magistrate, does not qualify as 'any other Court' under clause (b). Appeals against conviction for IT Act offences lie before Sessions Judge u/s 374 CrPC. If High Court allows appeal against inadequate sentence while Sessions Court acquits on appeal against conviction, it may lead to conflicting judgments. To avoid this, appeals against conviction and inadequate sentence must be dealt with simultaneously by the same court as held in Ammannamma case. u/s 377(3) CrPC, accused can plead for acquittal or sentence reduction in appeal against inadequate sentence, without waiting for State's appeal. Accused has statutory right u/s 374(3) CrPC to challenge conviction and sentence. Income Tax Department's appeals u/s 377 CrPC against inadequate sentence are not maintainable and dismissed.
Maintainability of appeals u/s 377 of CrPC against inadequate sentence was examined. Offences u/s 279-A of IT Act, 1961 are non-cognizable, triable by Magistrate. Special Court for economic offences, presided over by Magistrate, does not qualify as 'any other Court' under clause (b). Appeals against conviction for IT Act offences lie before Sessions Judge u/s 374 CrPC. If High Court allows appeal against inadequate sentence while Sessions Court acquits on appeal against conviction, it may lead to conflicting judgments. To avoid this, appeals against conviction and inadequate sentence must be dealt with simultaneously by the same court as held in Ammannamma case. u/s 377(3) CrPC, accused can plead for acquittal or sentence reduction in appeal against inadequate sentence, without waiting for State's appeal. Accused has statutory right u/s 374(3) CrPC to challenge conviction and sentence. Income Tax Department's appeals u/s 377 CrPC against inadequate sentence are not maintainable and dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
